| If I were Gessler, I'd look at the actual work of the journalist or media person who's requesting the interview. If their work shows them to be unfair, inaccurate, and generally unconcerned about civil discourse, then an elected official can justify not talking to them.
For my part, I can't help but be nicer to people if they let me interview them. I normally try to be fair, I'm even more careful if I actually talk to someone. I'm pushing 50 and I still think most writers are this way.
I asked progressive columnist and talk-show host David Sirota for his thoughts on this broad topic. According to John Turk, producer of the David Sirota Show on AM 760, Gessler spokesman Rich Coolidge told him last week, just after Gessler appeared on Grassroots Radio Colorado, that Gessler had "no interest" in coming on Sirota's show to talk about possible voter fraud.
Sirota emailed me:
My view is that the best elected officials are those who make themselves available to the widest possible audience of their constituents. In Colorado, though, that's the exception (Ed Perlmutter is one for instance), not the norm. Here, most politicians see themselves - and carry themselves - as if they are part of an elite country club. They typically only make themselves available to their friends in the media who they know won't ask them a single substantive or hard-hitting question - those who will simply propagandize for their agenda and kiss their ass in a very public way. I'm not surprised by that. I'm a journalist, and genuine journalism is a threat to those in power who are either ashamed of their behavior or who shouldn't have to answer to anyone. Most of the politicians in the state know that regardless of party, I don't pull punches and will ask them tough questions, and so many of them avoid my show. I see that as a badge of honor.
The Colorado Independent's John Tomasic has also gotten the cold shoulder from Gessler. Tomasic offered these thoughts in an email:
The question of officeholder responsiveness matters mostly in its relationship to accountability.
It seems obvious that when people elected to office are willing to go on public record regularly on topics big and small and to field unscripted questions, it's always a good sign for the city or state or country they're serving. As any fair-minded person in a position of authority knows, explaining your actions means making the case for them. If you can do that well, you gain legitimacy for those actions and support for them and cooperation to bring off your grand plans.
The energy it takes to explain yourself, even in fraught political or business environments, is worth it
Our secretary of state is a longtime controversial figure. It's my opinion that he revels in it. He's a courtroom attorney. I like that about him, the fact that he's a fighter, if for no other reason than he's fun to write about. Unfortunately, in office, it seems clear he is increasingly adopting what has become a familiar approach to the media on the right, which is to malign the media and retreat into a silo of friendly outlets while delivering an occasional stock quote to the paper of record. That just seems like a short-haul strategy to me.
Gessler is not a representative from some very conservative district.
He is a state officeholder. The topics he deals with every day as secretary of state are enormously important for all the citizens of Colorado. He oversees voting, campaign finance rules-- really basic stuff that is of equal interest to citizens all across the political spectrum. For that reason alone, he is a person of interest for everyone reporting about politics in this state: newspaper people, broadcast people, bloggers, etc, and he has a crack staff of communication experts at his disposal. Use them, I say! Let's hear more every day from spokespeople Rich and Andrew at the secretary of state's office. Turn those guys loose! "Free Rich!" "Free Andrew!"
Granted, the media is a player in the political process and dealing with the media as an elected official can certainly be like navigating a mine field. It's only my opinion but, as someone who has watched this politics-media tug of war with keen interest for years and who has watched big political stories unfold from the inside, as an editor and reporter, I can say that the subjects of those stories would have nearly always fared better by talking to the reporters writing the stories.
I'm reporting on the war over voting laws that has taken the nation by storm in the past two years. Gessler has put himself on the frontlines of that war, proposing major changes to our state election rules. So I'll keep asking questions. Maybe some day soon, I'll get a response.
Meantime, I'm developing a cordial and, I must say, fruitful relationship with the secretary's office conducted via the Colorado Open Records Act. It could be worse.
I'm ready to join the "Free Rich" campaign, and I'm thinking about offering myself up for the dunk tank at the first "Free Rich" fundraiser.
But as Tomasic illustrates, part of the trick of journalism is to find ways to get information when you can't get it mouth-to-mouth. Who else knows? What documents are available? Getting blacklisted for interviews, even in an apparently partisan manner from the Secretary of State, is how it goes.
And obviously both parties do this. Gov. John Hickenlooper won't go on KHOW's Caplis and Silverman show, the hosts allege on air. Though he's on KOA's Mike Rosen's Show monthly.
Rep. Scott Tipton isn't talking to the tea-party-leaning radio program, the Cari and Rob Show. But Tipton's Democratic challenger Sal Pace will go on the show.
KHOW's Peter Boyles likes to say no elected official will go on his show anymore, though I heard Rep. Chris Holbert and Sen. Ted Harvey on Boyles' show Feb. 15 to discuss their gun bills.
Mitt Romney skipped over all the major Denver media last month, eliciting an admirable Howard-Beale-like outcry from Fox 31 political reporter Eli Stokols.
It's always been this way, you'd say. But the changes in the media make the situation worse for real people (who stopped reading this blog post before the first paragraph, even though I put "rabid" in the title to lure them in).
With the major media in decline, and more small outlets lining up along ideological lines, many people are less likely to hear from elected officials they disagree with.
Progressives, for example, who consume news from progressive news outlets, won't be hearing from Scott Gessler directly any time soon, it appears.
That's not good, and you have to think it will get worse, because, politically, Gessler can write off the left, talk to his conservative base, and try to reach moderates through other means, which may or may not include The Denver Post in the long run.
Under this scenario, how does the partisan divide do anything but get wider?
To be fair, and this is my attempt at ending on a hopeful note, I should tell you that even after Gessler's office rejected my own interview requests, Gessler was willing to speak with me when I approached him after a speech he gave at Colorado Christian University. I told him I was a liberal blogger, and he still spoke with me.
In the semi-public setting, maybe he felt a responsibility, as an elected official, not to turn away from me?
But, like Westword, I didn't ask him the right follow-up question. Who knows if I'll get another chance? |
